Merged: Senate Inquiry
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelpi, keep up the great work. I assume from Sen Milnes question, she has seen a copy of the NZ contract? If she hasn't, then it would be a good time to drop it in her lap, showing BB as being in contempt of Parliament.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the grounding of the JQ Cadets:
Wait for it guys. I will get out my Crystal Ball and predict the Hansard for the next hearing:
SX: Mr Buchanan, You lied at the last hearing about the Cadet Wages, I have the proof here.
BB: No you are mistaken Senator, your document is out of date. Let me get to the facts. All our cadets are employed under either the JQ EBA or the Modern Pilots Award 2010.
More Spin!!
My Head hurts with all this spinning.
the Kelpie
It's offically a problem with the dodgey NZ contract.
The checked to line cadets cannot operate in OZ until they have an OZ contract or are employed on the EBA.
Got this from a mate at JQ who looked up one of the cadets on rockape and saw that he was SOC.......
What the fark are these idiots doing at this sorry excuse for an airline???
The checked to line cadets cannot operate in OZ until they have an OZ contract or are employed on the EBA.
Got this from a mate at JQ who looked up one of the cadets on rockape and saw that he was SOC.......
What the fark are these idiots doing at this sorry excuse for an airline???
SX: Mr Buchanan, You lied at the last hearing about the Cadet Wages, I have the proof here.
BB: No you are mistaken Senator, your document is out of date. Let me get to the facts. All our cadets are employed under either the JQ EBA or the Modern Pilots Award 2010.
More Spin!!
My Head hurts with all this spinning.
the Kelpie
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the cadets are as stated, maybe there is an issue re continuous disclosure by the Rat to ensure the market is fully informed.
Then again the toothless poodle ASIC has no great track record on enforcement like its brother regulators.
We can always hope.
Then again the toothless poodle ASIC has no great track record on enforcement like its brother regulators.
We can always hope.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big business taking advantage of young men and women with stars in their eyes and the various government bodies chose to turn a blind eye.
Of course there were a lot of applicants on face value it "looks" cool. Be an Airline pilot just pay the money.
Its like saying pay 200k and we will make you into a covergirl model. Do you reckon they might get few applicants?
When is someone at this inquiry going to say "stop playing stupid mate" or "cut the crap". Put my money on Heffernan for that one.
Of course there were a lot of applicants on face value it "looks" cool. Be an Airline pilot just pay the money.
Its like saying pay 200k and we will make you into a covergirl model. Do you reckon they might get few applicants?
When is someone at this inquiry going to say "stop playing stupid mate" or "cut the crap". Put my money on Heffernan for that one.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look, I do not normally do Character Assassination 
but something has been niggling at me for a couple of days now and I have to get it off my chest. I almost was physically sick when I heard the evidence that Anthony Petteford (the arrogant, overly confident one) gave to the Senate Enquiry.
The Hansard does not do it justice but I have to say his performance was impressive and one of confidence. So much so Senator Heffernan made the point later in the hearing to another witness that he gave 'strong evidence'. You will see below that Senator X also acknowledged his experience [as a pilot] having flown both B757 and A320 and asked him a direct question relating to this which he answered in his usual casual but authoritative manner. The following is taken straight from Hansard:
about that.
Bearing in mind that this guy could sell ice to eskimo's, you guys are all thinking at this point that his opinion is well valued as a person who has spent many years on the flight deck and is sufficiently qualified to make such statements.
Well, would it surprise you to know that you would all be wrong?
Mr Petteford, as he stated is endorsed on the A320 and B757, this is true. However, his tenure on the flight deck of the A320 lasted less than a year and was the result of a short sabbatical probably arranged through the Oxford " old boys network ". His time on type probably only extends to a few hundred hours. As for his qualification on the B757 this was done much later 'just for the fun of it' and he has never flown the B757 in line operations.
The hours for the ATPL he credits himself with were gained through flight instructing over a 3 year period commencing on 1983. All his jobs since then have been management and training positions mainly in IT but more recently as we all know as MD with Oxford Aviation.
If you were an eskimo, would you buy ice from him?
Do you think this was the persona and impression he gave the Senators?
I guess your answer may be no to both questions.
So why are we listening to this guys sales patter when we are looking for flying training?
I hope the Senate do not put too much weight to his evidence
I will leave this with you.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
but something has been niggling at me for a couple of days now and I have to get it off my chest. I almost was physically sick when I heard the evidence that Anthony Petteford (the arrogant, overly confident one) gave to the Senate Enquiry.The Hansard does not do it justice but I have to say his performance was impressive and one of confidence. So much so Senator Heffernan made the point later in the hearing to another witness that he gave 'strong evidence'. You will see below that Senator X also acknowledged his experience [as a pilot] having flown both B757 and A320 and asked him a direct question relating to this which he answered in his usual casual but authoritative manner. The following is taken straight from Hansard:
Senator XENOPHON
—We heard some evidence earlier, in terms of some training of
captains or pilots in simulators, that they are rated for the A320 but they have not flown the A320. They might have been trained up in Boeings. I think that there is quite a difference in the way that they operate. They still fly, but they are quite different.
captains or pilots in simulators, that they are rated for the A320 but they have not flown the A320. They might have been trained up in Boeings. I think that there is quite a difference in the way that they operate. They still fly, but they are quite different.
Mr Petteford
—I have flown both types. I have flown a traditional Boeing and I have flown
a—
a—
Senator XENOPHON
—I noticed your experience.
Mr Petteford
—I would say, no, an airliner these days is laid out in pretty standard chunks.
You have your systems overhead, your auto pilot, flight control panel, primary flight instruments and communications. The difference between the Boeing and the Airbus is that the Airbus’s stick is there. The 777 is a fly-by-wire aeroplane. You can pretty much go from one to the other.
You have your systems overhead, your auto pilot, flight control panel, primary flight instruments and communications. The difference between the Boeing and the Airbus is that the Airbus’s stick is there. The 777 is a fly-by-wire aeroplane. You can pretty much go from one to the other.
Senator XENOPHON
—So you are not concerned that a trainer has not flown that aircraft
type when they are training cadets?
type when they are training cadets?
Mr Petteford
—No. Provided they are experienced airline pilots, then I am not concerned
about that.
Well, would it surprise you to know that you would all be wrong?
Mr Petteford, as he stated is endorsed on the A320 and B757, this is true. However, his tenure on the flight deck of the A320 lasted less than a year and was the result of a short sabbatical probably arranged through the Oxford " old boys network ". His time on type probably only extends to a few hundred hours. As for his qualification on the B757 this was done much later 'just for the fun of it' and he has never flown the B757 in line operations.
The hours for the ATPL he credits himself with were gained through flight instructing over a 3 year period commencing on 1983. All his jobs since then have been management and training positions mainly in IT but more recently as we all know as MD with Oxford Aviation.
If you were an eskimo, would you buy ice from him?
Do you think this was the persona and impression he gave the Senators?
I guess your answer may be no to both questions.
So why are we listening to this guys sales patter when we are looking for flying training?
I hope the Senate do not put too much weight to his evidence
I will leave this with you.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Here in lies the problem of these Senate hearings in that those running it don't know the right questions to ask.
The straight up response to this "Oh so there is no difference between the Airbus and Boeing flight control laws?" or something similar. Then move on to show that infact there is a huge difference between the two types.
Unfortunately when those asking the questions don't really know what the hell they're talking about it makes it hard to decipher what is being said.
The difference between the Boeing and the Airbus is that the Airbus’s stick is there.
Unfortunately when those asking the questions don't really know what the hell they're talking about it makes it hard to decipher what is being said.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Australasia
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxford MPL Costs
Kelpie,
He lost me several times, but this particularly got me:
My understanding of the Alteon MPL Beta Trial here in Oz ballooned out to about 400 hours per head to meet the standard and the sim cost alone was probably more than a straight CPL... beware charlatans and snake oil salesmen!!!!!!!!!!
If I was negotiating, I guess he would be happy to sign up to a fixed price contract?
Oh, and on the "You can pretty much go from one to the other" comment, there will be some further illumination of the reality for the good senators
Stay Alive,
He lost me several times, but this particularly got me:
Senator XENOPHON—In terms of the costs involved for an MPL licence compared with a traditional licence, is it much cheaper?
Mr Petteford—No, it is pretty similar. By the time you take all of the phases together and the aircraft base training, the 12 circuits—bearing in mind in Australia there is no requirement for base aircraft, where the MPL does require 12—it is about the same.
Mr Petteford—No, it is pretty similar. By the time you take all of the phases together and the aircraft base training, the 12 circuits—bearing in mind in Australia there is no requirement for base aircraft, where the MPL does require 12—it is about the same.
If I was negotiating, I guess he would be happy to sign up to a fixed price contract?
Oh, and on the "You can pretty much go from one to the other" comment, there will be some further illumination of the reality for the good senators
Stay Alive,
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4dogs
It did blow out to those hours for various reasons during the China Eastern Pilot scheme and the results are still being monitored although some say the results are useless now in terms of assessing future effectiveness because the hours blew out so much. You would need to monitor cadets achieving the standard in the designed hours to have a effective evaluation.
As to the costs, it is about the same cost - to the cadet!!! Ask him about his costs and he should tell you it does not cost him as much to run. Sure he has significant capital expenditure in simulators and the cost of a High capacity RPT aircraft (as far as i am aware only aircraft in world eligible to be used for mpl are 737, A320 and Q400) to do 12 circuits but his variable costs such as fuel, maintenance and of course the aircraft fleet itself are much reduced as is his business risk of poor unflyable weather etc. Capital costs can be written off against student numbers, the more students through the door the cheaper the cost per hour, eventually the utopia being that the sim is paid for through sufficient student numbers or depreciated in the accounts against tax and much of the course fees paid by students will be profit. Do you think training prices will decrease over time to reflect these efficiencies?
Let's try and put some scale to this. Swinburne stated it had a total of 256 enrolled in training at the present time, it does not have it's own flight training facilities so lets assume it sub-contracts this element of the course to Oxford. So I will not include Oxford's own students to even things up. I assume that this number is pretty constant and that the course lasts 18 months. At $200k a pop (on the basis that swinburne makes its money from commonwealth grants etc.) that is $34million worth of business per year. Now i know they have running costs such as staff costs etc. But i would imagine it is more than enough to cover the purchase of an a320 and a few sims and write them off over a few years!!
So you see this is all about profit and the bottom line.
I learnt this lesson from an old company chairman, a man I consider as perhaps one of the most influential characters in my working life. Early in my career he asked me "what do Cadburys make". With a puzzled look I replied "chocolate!". To which he barked back at me " no son chocolate is the byproduct, they make f***ing money and that is what we are here to make". He went on to teach me the art of 'milking people with warm hands' as he put it.
As you allude to in your last post the devil is in the detail. As far as I am aware there is no such thing as a fixed price contract for 'privately funded' aviation training in Australia. I qualify this as I know of commercial arrangements between two organizations, an airline and a FTO that spit cadet out for a fixed price lump sum per cadet.
Do you think the JQ Cadet course is fixed price? Well it is not, they have a clause in the Oxford training agreement (yes I know another bloody contract) that has words to the effect of price based on minimum hours to achieve the required standard and any additional hours required must be paid as extra by the cadet etc. Etc. To be fair to Oxford, most flight training organizations have this. In anycase JQ have this well covered in their funding agreement where it allows them to unilaterally increase the cadet training costs without requiring approval from the cadet. A license to print money, effectively by signing this the cadet has written a blank cheque without realizing. But that is GEN Y all over!!
So now you see how FTOs manage the business risk of allowing anyone willing to walk through the door and part with lots and lots of their hard earned and teach them to fly. In the same way they are able to manage the risk of poor instruction from their Instructors, simple blame it on the student and make 'em pay. This is not business!!
Businesses, first class ones anyway, have confidence in the abilities in their staff to deliver a product or service so much so that they are able to offer a fixed price.
4dogs, as I said in my last post Petteford is a salesman and he tried peddling his goods to the Senators thinking that they were gen Ys with shiner white jet syndrome. Hopefully they were not thinking of buying!
As I have posted previously this is one such example of where the evidence has been tainted to protect and safeguard the commercial interests of the companies they represent rather than focus on what is important which is the safe skies of Australia.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
It did blow out to those hours for various reasons during the China Eastern Pilot scheme and the results are still being monitored although some say the results are useless now in terms of assessing future effectiveness because the hours blew out so much. You would need to monitor cadets achieving the standard in the designed hours to have a effective evaluation.
As to the costs, it is about the same cost - to the cadet!!! Ask him about his costs and he should tell you it does not cost him as much to run. Sure he has significant capital expenditure in simulators and the cost of a High capacity RPT aircraft (as far as i am aware only aircraft in world eligible to be used for mpl are 737, A320 and Q400) to do 12 circuits but his variable costs such as fuel, maintenance and of course the aircraft fleet itself are much reduced as is his business risk of poor unflyable weather etc. Capital costs can be written off against student numbers, the more students through the door the cheaper the cost per hour, eventually the utopia being that the sim is paid for through sufficient student numbers or depreciated in the accounts against tax and much of the course fees paid by students will be profit. Do you think training prices will decrease over time to reflect these efficiencies?
Let's try and put some scale to this. Swinburne stated it had a total of 256 enrolled in training at the present time, it does not have it's own flight training facilities so lets assume it sub-contracts this element of the course to Oxford. So I will not include Oxford's own students to even things up. I assume that this number is pretty constant and that the course lasts 18 months. At $200k a pop (on the basis that swinburne makes its money from commonwealth grants etc.) that is $34million worth of business per year. Now i know they have running costs such as staff costs etc. But i would imagine it is more than enough to cover the purchase of an a320 and a few sims and write them off over a few years!!
So you see this is all about profit and the bottom line.
I learnt this lesson from an old company chairman, a man I consider as perhaps one of the most influential characters in my working life. Early in my career he asked me "what do Cadburys make". With a puzzled look I replied "chocolate!". To which he barked back at me " no son chocolate is the byproduct, they make f***ing money and that is what we are here to make". He went on to teach me the art of 'milking people with warm hands' as he put it.
As you allude to in your last post the devil is in the detail. As far as I am aware there is no such thing as a fixed price contract for 'privately funded' aviation training in Australia. I qualify this as I know of commercial arrangements between two organizations, an airline and a FTO that spit cadet out for a fixed price lump sum per cadet.
Do you think the JQ Cadet course is fixed price? Well it is not, they have a clause in the Oxford training agreement (yes I know another bloody contract) that has words to the effect of price based on minimum hours to achieve the required standard and any additional hours required must be paid as extra by the cadet etc. Etc. To be fair to Oxford, most flight training organizations have this. In anycase JQ have this well covered in their funding agreement where it allows them to unilaterally increase the cadet training costs without requiring approval from the cadet. A license to print money, effectively by signing this the cadet has written a blank cheque without realizing. But that is GEN Y all over!!
So now you see how FTOs manage the business risk of allowing anyone willing to walk through the door and part with lots and lots of their hard earned and teach them to fly. In the same way they are able to manage the risk of poor instruction from their Instructors, simple blame it on the student and make 'em pay. This is not business!!
Businesses, first class ones anyway, have confidence in the abilities in their staff to deliver a product or service so much so that they are able to offer a fixed price.
4dogs, as I said in my last post Petteford is a salesman and he tried peddling his goods to the Senators thinking that they were gen Ys with shiner white jet syndrome. Hopefully they were not thinking of buying!
As I have posted previously this is one such example of where the evidence has been tainted to protect and safeguard the commercial interests of the companies they represent rather than focus on what is important which is the safe skies of Australia.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Last edited by The Kelpie; 9th Mar 2011 at 22:13.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The latest on todays events
Cadets grounded as Qantas strategy questioned by Senate
by Ben Sandilands
The Qantas strategy to shift jobs and tax obligations offshore through Jetstar to Singapore and New Zealand is in disarray today after the low-cost subsidiary was forced to suspend flying by at least four of its cadet pilots on Australian services at New Zealand pay rates.
Jetstar took the cadets off salary but left them on allowances “pending operational clearance” after evidence its group CEO Bruce Buchanan gave to a public hearing of the Senate inquiry into pilot training and airline safety standards caused anger among pilots and direct complaints about its accuracy to members of the Rural Affairs and Transport Committee.
Buchanan has been recalled by the Senate inquiry to a hearing next Friday, March 18.
Under the Jetstar cadet scheme young pilots with prior flying experience entered into a contract with Jetstar New Zealand to be trained to take pilot positions with Jetstar, including flights in Australia. The savings to Jetstar, and the losses of revenue to the ATO, of Jetstar pilots flying in Australia under New Zealand labor conditions are substantial.
The Australian and International Pilots Association, which is in dispute with Qantas over its strategy of shifting pilot jobs overseas onto New Zealand and Singaporean terms and conditions, is understood to have recruited at least one of the cadets into its organisation on the grounds of industrial protection.
That cadet, a resident of Australia who has never taken up residence in New Zealand, was among four Jetstar cadets who have confirmed they were flown to New Zealand by Jetstar for the purpose of opening a New Zealand bank account.
They are paid in New Zealand dollars at a large discount over similarly experienced Australian Jetstar pilots, for flying duties that have been exclusively performed in Australia.
After their three-day bank account opening exercise in New Zealand, which included “observing” Jetstar operations on several intra-New Zealand flights, the cadets at their own expense undertook seven weeks of endorsement training for Airbus jets in the UK, and then carried out line training with Jetstar in Australia.
The cadets have been suspended from flying duties and are receiving allowances but no salary “pending operational clearance”. It isn’t clear whether that clearance to fly in Australia will come from CASA or the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority.
Jetconnect is a mock Qantas full service operation that flies trans-Tasman routes in Qantas livery with staff paid under New Zealand terms and conditions for work that used to performed by real Qantas employees.
Qantas has also transferred two Australian-registered, Jetstar-painted Airbus A330 jets to Singapore to perform Melbourne-Singapore and Auckland-Singapore flights under Singaporean labour contracts as a curtain raiser to the basing of a larger fleet of jets, including Boeing 787s, at Changi Airport.
by Ben Sandilands
The Qantas strategy to shift jobs and tax obligations offshore through Jetstar to Singapore and New Zealand is in disarray today after the low-cost subsidiary was forced to suspend flying by at least four of its cadet pilots on Australian services at New Zealand pay rates.
Jetstar took the cadets off salary but left them on allowances “pending operational clearance” after evidence its group CEO Bruce Buchanan gave to a public hearing of the Senate inquiry into pilot training and airline safety standards caused anger among pilots and direct complaints about its accuracy to members of the Rural Affairs and Transport Committee.
Buchanan has been recalled by the Senate inquiry to a hearing next Friday, March 18.
Under the Jetstar cadet scheme young pilots with prior flying experience entered into a contract with Jetstar New Zealand to be trained to take pilot positions with Jetstar, including flights in Australia. The savings to Jetstar, and the losses of revenue to the ATO, of Jetstar pilots flying in Australia under New Zealand labor conditions are substantial.
The Australian and International Pilots Association, which is in dispute with Qantas over its strategy of shifting pilot jobs overseas onto New Zealand and Singaporean terms and conditions, is understood to have recruited at least one of the cadets into its organisation on the grounds of industrial protection.
That cadet, a resident of Australia who has never taken up residence in New Zealand, was among four Jetstar cadets who have confirmed they were flown to New Zealand by Jetstar for the purpose of opening a New Zealand bank account.
They are paid in New Zealand dollars at a large discount over similarly experienced Australian Jetstar pilots, for flying duties that have been exclusively performed in Australia.
After their three-day bank account opening exercise in New Zealand, which included “observing” Jetstar operations on several intra-New Zealand flights, the cadets at their own expense undertook seven weeks of endorsement training for Airbus jets in the UK, and then carried out line training with Jetstar in Australia.
The cadets have been suspended from flying duties and are receiving allowances but no salary “pending operational clearance”. It isn’t clear whether that clearance to fly in Australia will come from CASA or the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority.
Jetconnect is a mock Qantas full service operation that flies trans-Tasman routes in Qantas livery with staff paid under New Zealand terms and conditions for work that used to performed by real Qantas employees.
Qantas has also transferred two Australian-registered, Jetstar-painted Airbus A330 jets to Singapore to perform Melbourne-Singapore and Auckland-Singapore flights under Singaporean labour contracts as a curtain raiser to the basing of a larger fleet of jets, including Boeing 787s, at Changi Airport.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelpie Kudos
Kelpie - As usual you are right on the money...Bravo! Many thanks for all your efforts in rallying this cause and keeping us in the loop. 
I hope the Senators have all the evidence they need to refute these management lies and issue some sensible rulings to sort this mess...
I hope the Senators have all the evidence they need to refute these management lies and issue some sensible rulings to sort this mess...
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if we will get a statement from AIPA today?
I thought AFAP was the union representing Jetstar Pilots??
- perhaps a statement from them?
Even better would be a joint one - shoulder to shoulder on the issue!!!
a couple of questions:
Where the Cadets on their visit to New Zealand classified as employees during the visit. If not, what place did they have on the Jumpseat??
Did they get paid for this visit or was this just another freebie they were expected to do?
I have posted on another thread about the minimum wage act in New Zealand and how you are entitled to be paid for all hours worked, and I think it is time someone looked into that too instead of dismissing it.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
I thought AFAP was the union representing Jetstar Pilots??
- perhaps a statement from them?
Even better would be a joint one - shoulder to shoulder on the issue!!!
a couple of questions:
Where the Cadets on their visit to New Zealand classified as employees during the visit. If not, what place did they have on the Jumpseat??
Did they get paid for this visit or was this just another freebie they were expected to do?
I have posted on another thread about the minimum wage act in New Zealand and how you are entitled to be paid for all hours worked, and I think it is time someone looked into that too instead of dismissing it.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Last edited by The Kelpie; 10th Mar 2011 at 02:57.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop Press
WTF is an Australian (Commonwealth) Contract??
Jetstar hissy fit reveals two tier pay scale for new pilots
March 10, 2011 – 4:52 pm, by Ben Sandilands
In an angry response to the earlier posting on Plane Talking Jetstar has revealed plans to put new pilots onto a two tier pay scheme by transferring graduates from its sham New Zealand cadet scheme onto an Australian ‘modern award’.
The Australian and International Pilots Association says this would mean a lower pay scale for pilots doing the same work , as their is already a current EBA covering Jetstar pilots under which it would expect the carrier to employ new hires.
This is what Jetstar says about our earlier report.
This now appears to have been replaced in haste with a plan to employ the pilots in Australia, a move which will however mean that those earnings will be taxed in Australia and attract a superannuation levy.
The Jetstar response continues to insist that this was a New Zealand training scheme, even though the only connection the cadets had with New Zealand was a New Zealand bank account and tax file number that they were flown to New Zealand by Jetstar in order to open and acquire.
One could easily come to the ‘sensational’ conclusion, as the pilots association has, that this is a sham.
Shortly before Jetstar reacted to the story the pilots association released this reaction to the grounding of the cadets.
March 10, 2011 – 4:52 pm, by Ben Sandilands
In an angry response to the earlier posting on Plane Talking Jetstar has revealed plans to put new pilots onto a two tier pay scheme by transferring graduates from its sham New Zealand cadet scheme onto an Australian ‘modern award’.
The Australian and International Pilots Association says this would mean a lower pay scale for pilots doing the same work , as their is already a current EBA covering Jetstar pilots under which it would expect the carrier to employ new hires.
This is what Jetstar says about our earlier report.
Jetstar wishes to respond to the posting dated 10 March relating to our Cadet Pilot Program.
Jetstar stands by its Cadet Pilot Program, which was launched last year, and rejects recent criticism with respect to the employment arrangements of our Cadet Pilots.
Today’s Plane Talking posting takes a grossly sensationalised position.
Jetstar is currently finalising and is merely days away from offering Australian (Commonwealth) contracts for its Cadet Pilots that is in line with the modern award.
For the record, three Jetstar Cadet Pilots, each out of our training program based in New Zealand, have just concluded their line training with Jetstar and have been ‘checked to line’ by our airline, the background and basis for the Plane Talking posting. All three took place in the past six days.
The three are temporarily unable to fly within Australia until the finalisation of an Australian (Commonwealth) employment contract. The matter is likely to be rectified within days, due to a delay in finalising the workplace arrangement.
The putting in place of an Australian employment mechanism – and delays in this process – is the sole reason for this short term delay experienced by our three Cadet Pilots from re-entering our operations.
Contrary to what was stated in the posting, these Cadet Pilots are receiving full remuneration at this time. They will not be out of pocket whilst waiting for their Australian workplace contract to be finalised.
Jetstar will employ these Pilot Cadets under an Australian (Commonwealth) contract that is in line with the modern award.
We wish to make it clear it has always been our intention to have an Australian employment agreement in place for our Cadet Pilots.
Further with respect to clearance for Jetstar Cadet Pilots to fly, this is the responsibility of Jetstar’s Check and Training organisation within the airline (through delegation).
All of our Cadet Pilots are on existing Individual Employment Agreements (IEA) in New Zealand.
But according to the testimony given by Bruce Buchanan, the Jetstar Group CEO, to the Senate inquiry into pilot training and airline safety on February 25, Jetstar’s intention with the NZ scheme was to employ the graduates on a New Zealand award under which he claimed they could earn up to $NZ67,000 a year.This now appears to have been replaced in haste with a plan to employ the pilots in Australia, a move which will however mean that those earnings will be taxed in Australia and attract a superannuation levy.
The Jetstar response continues to insist that this was a New Zealand training scheme, even though the only connection the cadets had with New Zealand was a New Zealand bank account and tax file number that they were flown to New Zealand by Jetstar in order to open and acquire.
One could easily come to the ‘sensational’ conclusion, as the pilots association has, that this is a sham.
Shortly before Jetstar reacted to the story the pilots association released this reaction to the grounding of the cadets.
QANTAS MUST COME CLEAN ON CADET SCAM
There are disturbing revelations that the Qantas Group has set up another sham employment scheme to evade the Australian industrial relations system and pay cadet pilots in New Zealand dollars.
A group of Jetstar cadets face an uncertain future after being stood down without pay, pending ‘operational clearance’.
Despite being Australian citizens, when they were first recruited the cadets were asked by the Qantas Group to go to New Zealand for three days of observational flying and to open New Zealand bank accounts.
They then did their endorsement training in the UK and their line training in Australia whilst being paid in New Zealand dollars.
Now that they have completed their training, the cadets have been left to their own devices on a basic living allowance and are awaiting an Australian contract based in Australia.
“The Qantas Group must give these young cadets some assurance of what is in store for them and quickly,” Australian and International Pilots Association Vice President Captain Richard Woodward said.
“The company needs to show faith and reassure these cadets that it intends to stand by the commitments it made.”
“We want them up in the air again as soon as possible, on full pay, under the Australian Jetstar Pilots Agreement.”
Captain Woodward said it was also important the company clarify exactly why it was basing its cadet training in New Zealand yet clearly operating it out of the UK and Australia.
“It’s an absolute disgrace that a company can consistently market itself as the national carrier and then go out of its way to avoid Australian workplace laws by placing its Australian cadets on New Zealand contracts and paying them in New Zealand dollars.
“That includes basic entitlements Australian workers take for granted, like the 9% compulsory superannuation contribution,” Captain Woodward said.
The news about Jetstar training its cadets in New Zealand is only the latest example of the company trying to undercut Australian pilots and avoid Australian workplace and superannuation laws.
Last year Qantas gave its New Zealand subsidiary, Jetconnect responsibility for the majority of all trans-Tasman flights and Mr Paul Daff, Head of Jetconnect, has confirmed in recent court proceedings that an additional 28 flights per week will be transferred from Qantas to Jetconnect in May 2011.
Employment conditions at Jetconnect are inferior, with pilots earning almost one-third less than they do at Qantas.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thick and Fast today!
Pilot fatigued during mid-air stall scare
By Myles Morgan
Posted 1 hour 30 minutes ago
A Qantas jet had about 70 people on board when the incident happened. [File image]. (Reuters: Tim Wimborne, file photo)
A report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau has found the pilot of a Qantas Boeing 717-200 was stressed and fatigued when the plane came close to stalling as it prepared to land in Alice Springs in 2008.
The ATSB says the jet had about 70 people on board when it approached the airport "higher, faster and closer" than was suitable for the landing.
A "stick-shaker" warning alerted the flight crew that the aircraft was close to aerodynamically stalling.
The jet landed without incident after the flight crew corrected the approach.
The ATSB report notes the pilot was stressed at the time of the incident.
"The [pilot] recalled that, during the incident flight, he had been thinking about those stresses and believed that this might have contributed to the event by distracting him prior to descent."
The report says the pilot had also been struggling to get enough sleep in the days prior to the incident.
"The [pilot] reported staying at temporary accommodation and sleeping on average for only four hours a night.
"The [pilot] considered that fatigue was a factor during the approach into Alice Springs, in that it affected [their] clarity of judgement and concentration."
By Myles Morgan
Posted 1 hour 30 minutes ago
A Qantas jet had about 70 people on board when the incident happened. [File image]. (Reuters: Tim Wimborne, file photo)A report by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau has found the pilot of a Qantas Boeing 717-200 was stressed and fatigued when the plane came close to stalling as it prepared to land in Alice Springs in 2008.
The ATSB says the jet had about 70 people on board when it approached the airport "higher, faster and closer" than was suitable for the landing.
A "stick-shaker" warning alerted the flight crew that the aircraft was close to aerodynamically stalling.
The jet landed without incident after the flight crew corrected the approach.
The ATSB report notes the pilot was stressed at the time of the incident.
"The [pilot] recalled that, during the incident flight, he had been thinking about those stresses and believed that this might have contributed to the event by distracting him prior to descent."
The report says the pilot had also been struggling to get enough sleep in the days prior to the incident.
"The [pilot] reported staying at temporary accommodation and sleeping on average for only four hours a night.
"The [pilot] considered that fatigue was a factor during the approach into Alice Springs, in that it affected [their] clarity of judgement and concentration."
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That guy was under a lot of pressure and shame on the person who was primarily responsible for putting him under that pressure.
Unfortunately that same person portrays themselves on this site as a "pilots friend". He knows who he is.
Unfortunately that same person portrays themselves on this site as a "pilots friend". He knows who he is.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelpie, my understanding is that unless on an EBA or some transitional arrangement (already employed prior to the FWA on an AWA), then the "default" minimum T&C's is the relevant award, the Air Pilots Award 2010. I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.
The interesting thing about this award is there is no "Junior First Officer" classification. So putting them on this award will actually be a higher rate than a JFO on the EBA.
The interesting thing about this award is there is no "Junior First Officer" classification. So putting them on this award will actually be a higher rate than a JFO on the EBA.